• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

John S. McCain ND2A

Rogue Valley said:
The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2019 was signed by Trump on August 13, 2018. It authorizes about $700 million for military construction in Europe with $250 million included for security assistance to Ukraine, $50 million in lethal weapons.

DklBqB6XcAEtxNt.jpg


DkoRpZ-X0AELQHB.jpg


The US and Europe should always dedicate funding for nuts and bolts military infrastructure, but more funding is also needed to combat Russian hacking/disinformation cyberattacks on the European continent.
Click to expand...

You know that some funding is off the books, right?
 
Godric1970 said:
seriously go back to sleep and wake up when you can grow a stuble

white paper from 2012 20,000 Armed forces that includes 3 mechanised brigades, 4 new frigates, a LHD, 4 corvettes, X amount of patrol craft, a marine battalion, 17 - 20 fast jets 10 attack helicopters, training planes, transport planes, transport helicopters, maritime patrol aircraft, a parachute battalion, special forces built up over 25 years

the white paper lays out the first 10 years .... it was later fleshed out

as i said you know nothing
Click to expand...

What's a stuble?
 
Funny part is to see where the money goes.

Money going to the UK, Germany, Spain Italy and Greece are mostly for bases used in the never ending US war against the Muslim world and have nothing to do with NATO. Oh and that portion is the largest part...

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
 
Rogue Valley said:
Yup. You'll be invincible.

Lol. One of the few nations probably susceptible to the black-smoke belching Admiral Kuznetsov.
Click to expand...

more than enough to defend Scotland and partake in UN missions .... currently Scotland is poorly defended by the UK's conventional forces ... we will be neutral like Ireland ... seeing as Scotland won't be part of NATO we won't be able to buy NATO (US/rUK) based technology that rules out the Grippen, Eurofighter, every US made aircraft and the Rafale leaving only Russian aircraft or Chinese
 
Godric1970 said:
i never said it was a beard i said it was a stubble
Click to expand...
Well, the beginnings of a beard you showed are then not the beginning of anything I'd call a beard. Butt fluff be butt fluff.;)
 
Godric1970 said:
more than enough to defend Scotland and partake in UN missions .... currently Scotland is poorly defended by the UK's conventional forces ... we will be neutral like Ireland ... seeing as Scotland won't be part of NATO we won't be able to buy NATO (US/rUK) based technology that rules out the Grippen, Eurofighter, every US made aircraft and the Rafale leaving only Russian aircraft or Chinese
Click to expand...
Just bombard anything that approaches with Haggis.
 
Chagos said:
Just bombard anything that approaches with Haggis.
Click to expand...

how do you fancy taking on 5 million dafties armed with chibs and broken bottles to shove in yer face ..... fighting Scottish style ... lol

in all seriousness our position will be that of Ireland neutrality .... but i doubt NATO and America will let that slide
 
Godric1970 said:
how do you fancy taking on 5 million dafties armed with chibs and broken bottles to shove in yer face ..... fighting Scottish style ... lol

in all seriousness our position will be that of Ireland neutrality .... but i doubt NATO and America will let that slide
Click to expand...

They wont.. they need Scotland as part of the second line of defence for the Russian Baltic fleet. First line is keeping Denmark in play so we can block the Russian fleet from getting into open sea, and if that fails, then the UK (Channel/North Sea) and Norway (North Sea) is the last hope we have of keeping the fleet away from open seas... or at least that is the theory.
 
PeteEU said:
They wont.. they need Scotland as part of the second line of defence for the Russian Baltic fleet. First line is keeping Denmark in play so we can block the Russian fleet from getting into open sea, and if that fails, then the UK (Channel/North Sea) and Norway (North Sea) is the last hope we have of keeping the fleet away from open seas... or at least that is the theory.
Click to expand...

NATO will hit Scotland with a ultimatum keep the rUK nuclear fleet at faslane or no NATO membership .... it would be suicide for any Scottish government to keep nukes in the country especially another countries nukes ... the way things are going we want to be totally nuclear free ... they will be told to go f**k themselves like Obama and Clinton we told when we released abdelbaset al-megrahi to go back home to die in Libya .... and how do you think Scotland's relationship is with Trump when he is complaining to Teresa May that the Scottish Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon hates him
 
PeteEU said:
They wont.. they need Scotland as part of the second line of defence for the Russian Baltic fleet. First line is keeping Denmark in play so we can block the Russian fleet from getting into open sea, and if that fails, then the UK (Channel/North Sea) and Norway (North Sea) is the last hope we have of keeping the fleet away from open seas... or at least that is the theory.
Click to expand...


The Baltic Fleet is no threat to anyone. It's not capable of much blue water activity, and is primarily geared to A2D activities in the Baltic Sea.
 
I'd agree that the Baltic Fleet isn't really geared for operating in the Hebrides:mrgreen:, but to say it is no danger to anyone constitutes yet another example of the dishonesty constantly displayed here.

It is most decidedly a threat to all states along the Baltic and designed to combat any NATO intervention, should Russian land grab ambitions (once again) target any of those states .
 
Chagos said:
I'd agree that the Baltic Fleet isn't really geared for operating in the Hebrides:mrgreen:, but to say it is no danger to anyone constitutes yet another example of the dishonesty constantly displayed here.

It is most decidedly a threat to all states along the Baltic and designed to combat any NATO intervention, should Russian land grab ambitions (once again) target any of those states .
Click to expand...

any Russian/Baltic fleet would have to navigate through the Oresund and the Kategatt to reach the north sea ... they could easily be bottled in their and Russia knows this
 
Godric1970 said:
any Russian/Baltic fleet would have to navigate through the Oresund and the Kategatt to reach the north sea ... they could easily be bottled in their and Russia knows this
Click to expand...
Kinda what I said.
 
Fledermaus said:
It is a threat to Baltic states.
Click to expand...


The point is that it's a purely defensive fleet. It has little amphibious assault capability (you know, something the US Navy specialises in), and primarily is focused on area denial. You only say it's a threat to the Baltic states because they're so close to Russia.

Back to the original point ........ if NATO had not expanded to Russia's borders, all this nonsense talk would not exist. NATO will soon request that Russia withdraws all its forces to the Urals so as not to 'threaten' the NATO forces on Russia's borders :roll:
 
Westphalian said:
The Baltic Fleet is no threat to anyone. It's not capable of much blue water activity, and is primarily geared to A2D activities in the Baltic Sea.
Click to expand...
Not the point... the Baltic fleet has never been a threat but still NATO policy has been to contain it....which Denmark dies and then UK/Norway.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
 
PeteEU said:
Not the point... the Baltic fleet has never been a threat but still NATO policy has been to contain it....which Denmark dies and then UK/Norway.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...


See my post above.

The absorption of weak and paranoid Russophobic Baltic states has predictably led to more insecurity not the reverse.

Russia needs to react to NATO's alleged 'defensive containment' and forward deployment of forces into the Baltics. Surely you can see that this is inevitable given both the history of Russia and NATO? This creates the ever worsening cycle of insecurity and militarisation - which ultimately benefits the US MIC but dis-benefits everyone who lives in Europe.
 
The only thing one needs to see is both the history of Russia and of the Baltic states, plus the historical relationship between both camps.

The sense of insecurity on the side of the latter is easily explained historically and no matter how much one wishes to confuse realism with Russophobia, that kind of distortion will work as little as all the other attempts do.

Russia is not popular among the Baltics and there's no reason why it should be.
 
Further to which the Baltic fleet is a threat to the Baltic states because it's commanded by the Kremlin. As anyone even remotely acquainted with history will realize.

That it has less amphibious assault capacity than NATO is precisely the point. Seeing how Moscow need not even go amphibious to assault the Baltic states but NATO would have to (at least in part) to counter the Kremlin's land forces.

In which the Baltic fleet would be an annoyance.

We have seen thruout history that the Kremlin has no such thing as defensive forces, its primary military objective having always been aggression.

Napoleon and Hitler serving as exceptions taking nothing from that.
 
Chagos said:
The only thing one needs to see is both the history of Russia and of the Baltic states, plus the historical relationship between both camps.

The sense of insecurity on the side of the latter is easily explained historically and no matter how much one wishes to confuse realism with Russophobia, that kind of distortion will work as little as all the other attempts do.

Russia is not popular among the Baltics and there's no reason why it should be.
Click to expand...

Indeed. It was Moscow that occupied the Baltic States, not the other way around.

Which reminds me. 29 years ago on this very day.....

freedom0409.png


On 23 August 1989, 2 million people from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania joined hands, forming a human chain from Tallinn through Riga to Vilnius,
spanning 600 kilometers, or 430 miles. It was a peaceful protest against illegal Soviet occupation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom